Sorry to ask many snippets of questions rather than chunk them to gether. If an initiator issed five different createPendingAgreement operations, May I understand that it is the initiator's responsibility to create 5 different initiatorAcceptance EPR so that the response might be discriminated properly?
F. A new createPendingAgreement operation is introduced where an input offer initiates an asynchronous acceptance decision; the response is either a fault (fatal errors/rejection) or an EPR to an Agreement that MAY be in Pending, Observed, or Rejected state.
1. The responder MUST update its state RP to either Observed or Rejected following its decision.
2. The initiator MAY use alternate mechanisms to determine if and when the Agreement transfers to Observed, including but not limited to the querying of a state RP. Until the initiator determines the state as changed to Observed or Rejected, it SHOULD NOT assume the outcome.
3. An optional initiatorAcceptance EPR MAY appear in the input message, in which case the responder MUST invoke acceptAgreement or rejectAgreement to communicate its decision, in addition to updating its state RP.
4. An optional initiatorAgreement EPR MAY appear as in createAgreement. This EPR MAY be the same as the initiatorAcceptance EPR, if the service implements both interfaces.
5. Should the output allow an optional state indicator? I think it is simpler to say "no" and uniformly assume an interaction after creation.
-- We have moved to a new Office!! Toshiyuki Nakata ????? Internet System Laboratories NEC t-nakata@cw.jp.nec.com 1753, Shimonumabe, Nakahara-Ku, Kawasaki,Kanagawa 211-8666,Japan Tel +81-44-431-7653 (NEC Internal 22-60210) Fax +81-44-431-7681 (NEC Internal 22-60219)